Last updated: 2018-07-22
workflowr checks: (Click a bullet for more information) ✔ R Markdown file: up-to-date
Great! Since the R Markdown file has been committed to the Git repository, you know the exact version of the code that produced these results.
✔ Repository version: 302143d
wflow_publish
or wflow_git_commit
). workflowr only checks the R Markdown file, but you know if there are other scripts or data files that it depends on. Below is the status of the Git repository when the results were generated:
Ignored files:
Ignored: .DS_Store
Ignored: .Rhistory
Ignored: .Rproj.user/
Ignored: docs/.DS_Store
Ignored: docs/images/.DS_Store
Ignored: output/.DS_Store
Unstaged changes:
Modified: analysis/MASHvFLASHgtex2.Rmd
Deleted: analysis/license.Rmd
Modified: code/sims2.R
Modified: output/README.md
Note that any generated files, e.g. HTML, png, CSS, etc., are not included in this status report because it is ok for generated content to have uncommitted changes.
File | Version | Author | Date | Message |
---|---|---|---|---|
Rmd | 302143d | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-07-22 | wflow_publish(c(“analysis/index.Rmd”, “analysis/about.Rmd”)) |
html | f4ebd13 | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-27 | Build site. |
Rmd | 2ce499f | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-27 | wflow_publish(c(“analysis/about.Rmd”, “analysis/index.Rmd”)) |
html | a9c6a2d | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-26 | Build site. |
Rmd | e6b255b | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-26 | wflow_publish(“analysis/index.Rmd”) |
html | 07d1fc7 | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-24 | Build site. |
Rmd | 660d4c5 | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-24 | wflow_publish(c(“analysis/index.Rmd”)) |
html | 97fa87c | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-24 | Build site. |
Rmd | 42cd89c | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-24 | wflow_publish(c(“analysis/MASHvFLASHsims2.Rmd”, |
html | 05ddaac | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-18 | Build site. |
Rmd | 59c9e8e | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-18 | wflow_publish(“analysis/index.Rmd”) |
html | c7561ae | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-18 | Build site. |
Rmd | 6422a12 | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-18 | wflow_publish(“analysis/index.Rmd”) |
html | 55504ec | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-16 | Build site. |
Rmd | 94b77ff | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-16 | wflow_publish(“analysis/index.Rmd”) |
html | 95f1aca | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-15 | Build site. |
Rmd | 2052215 | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-15 | wflow_publish(“analysis/index.Rmd”) |
html | 958fa1e | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-11 | Build site. |
Rmd | 99104f2 | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-11 | wflow_publish(“analysis/index.Rmd”) |
html | a738d4a | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-09 | Build site. |
Rmd | 6e63015 | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-09 | wflow_publish(“analysis/index.Rmd”) |
html | 53ca12c | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-09 | initial setup |
Rmd | 3314e19 | Jason Willwerscheid | 2018-06-09 | Start workflowr project. |
Introduction. A vignette.
MASH v FLASH simulation results. Compares FLASH fits to MASH fits in a number of settings. Uses various methods to fit the FLASH object. The “OHL” method is best.
MASH v FLASH on GTEx. Compares FLASH to MASH using data from the GTEx project. Results are similar, but FLASH is more conservative.
MASH v FLASH detailed simulation study. Using the “OHL” method, compares the performance of FLASH-pn, FLASH-ash, and MASH in a single simulation setting. FLASH and MASH perform differently on different covariance structures. There is little or no advantage to using ash priors rather than point-normals.
MASH v FLASH detailed GTEx study. Uses an improved workflow to examine differences in MASH and FLASH fits to GTEx data. Particularly strong effects in a single condition might cause MASH to miss smaller effects that are shared among conditions. But FLASH might miss very small effects that are shared across all conditions.
A first attempt. Stowed and forgotten.
This reproducible R Markdown analysis was created with workflowr 1.0.1